DoD's $335M construction contract for Hawaii facilities awarded to DCK Pacific, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $335,077,713 ($335.1M)

Contractor: DCK Pacific, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-04-12

End Date: 2013-05-10

Contract Duration: 2,220 days

Daily Burn Rate: $150.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: LUMP SUM PRICE

Place of Performance

Location: WAHIAWA, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96786

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $335.1 million to DCK PACIFIC, LLC for work described as: LUMP SUM PRICE Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. 3. The duration of 2220 days (approximately 6 years) suggests a long-term commitment to the project. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, this contract falls under the Defense sector. 5. The contract's value of $335 million positions it as a significant investment in infrastructure. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates a focus on larger, established contractors.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $335 million construction contract is challenging without specific project details or comparable projects. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally aims to control costs for the government. The duration of over six years suggests a substantial project, and the price should be evaluated against the scope of work and prevailing construction costs in Hawaii during the award period (2007-2013). Without more granular data on the specific construction services rendered, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant construction project. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of bids would typically lead to more robust price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, despite only two bidders, aimed to ensure the government received competitive pricing. However, the limited number of bidders might have constrained the downward pressure on price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel stationed in Hawaii, who will utilize the improved facilities. The contract delivers essential construction and renovation services for military infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Hawaii, supporting military operations in the Pacific region. The project likely involved a significant workforce of construction laborers, engineers, and project managers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all project complexities.
Risk of schedule delays impacting military readiness if construction timelines are not met.
Dependence on a single contractor for a large-scale, long-duration project can create leverage issues.
Limited competition (2 bidders) may have resulted in a higher-than-optimal price.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Awarded under full and open competition, promoting a fair process.
Long contract duration allows for phased execution and potential learning curve efficiencies.
Contractor's experience in commercial and institutional building construction is relevant to the project scope.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports military readiness, government operations, and public infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies, particularly in high-cost regions like Hawaii. The market for large federal construction contracts is often dominated by a few major players with the capacity and experience to handle such projects.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the 'sb' field is false, indicating no explicit small business participation requirement was noted in the provided data. This suggests the contract was likely awarded to a large prime contractor capable of handling the scale and complexity. Subcontracting opportunities may exist for small businesses, but this would depend on the prime contractor's procurement practices and is not explicitly detailed in the award information.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction (MILCON)
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Large-Scale Construction Projects

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase exposure to changing requirements or economic conditions.
Limited competition (2 bidders) could indicate potential for suboptimal pricing.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to disputes if scope is not clearly defined.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $335.1 million to DCK PACIFIC, LLC. LUMP SUM PRICE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DCK PACIFIC, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $335.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-04-12. End: 2013-05-10.

What specific types of commercial and institutional buildings were constructed or renovated under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (NAICS 236220) but does not specify the exact types of buildings. Typically, for the Department of the Navy in Hawaii, such contracts could encompass barracks, administrative offices, training facilities, maintenance depots, or support buildings essential for military operations. A detailed review of the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS) would be necessary to identify the precise structures involved. Without this, we can only infer based on general military infrastructure needs.

How does the awarded price of $335 million compare to similar construction projects in Hawaii during the 2007-2013 period?

Comparing the $335 million price tag requires access to a database of similar federal or large-scale private construction projects in Hawaii between 2007 and 2013, along with their scope and specifications. Construction costs in Hawaii are generally higher than the continental U.S. due to logistics and labor. To assess value, one would need to normalize for project size, complexity, and specific building types. For instance, comparing it to the cost per square foot of other barracks or administrative facilities built during that era would provide a more meaningful benchmark. The limited competition (two bidders) might suggest the price was not aggressively bid down.

What were the primary risks identified by the Department of the Navy prior to awarding this contract, and how were they mitigated?

While specific pre-award risk assessments are not detailed in the provided data, common risks for large, long-duration construction contracts include cost overruns (mitigated by the firm-fixed-price structure), schedule delays (mitigated by performance clauses and liquidated damages), unforeseen site conditions (mitigated by site investigations and contingency planning), and contractor performance issues (mitigated by pre-qualification and past performance reviews). Given the firm-fixed-price nature, the primary risk borne by the government is ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope, quality, and schedule. The Navy would have assessed DCK Pacific's capacity and past performance.

What is the track record of DCK PACIFIC, LLC in executing large federal construction contracts, particularly for the Department of the Navy?

Information on DCK PACIFIC, LLC's specific track record for large federal contracts, especially with the Department of the Navy, is not provided in the summary data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their contract history, including past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any history of disputes or litigation, and the successful completion of projects of similar scale and complexity. Their award on this $335 million contract suggests they met the Navy's pre-qualification criteria regarding experience and capability at the time of award.

How has federal spending on commercial and institutional building construction in Hawaii trended over the past decade, and where does this contract fit?

Analyzing federal spending trends in Hawaii for NAICS code 236220 over the past decade would require accessing historical federal procurement data (e.g., FPDS-NG or SAM.gov). This contract, awarded in 2007 and completed in 2013, represents a significant single investment during its performance period. Its value of $335 million would likely place it among the larger contracts within that category for Hawaii during that timeframe. Understanding broader trends would reveal if this was an anomaly, part of a larger infrastructure push, or typical spending for military base development in the region.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N6274206R1317

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 707 RICHARDS ST STE 400, HONOLULU, HI, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $335,117,713

Exercised Options: $335,077,713

Current Obligation: $335,077,713

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline